Sweet spot for MacBook Pro 14" configuration

[rajkumarpatel79]

Thank You Guys. I may pull the trigger for 16GB RAM. with 1TB SSD, guess it use SSD for overflow memory area.

I use the Max chip but honestly I think the Pro chip is better for almost all use cases. the extra battery life of the Pro chip is well worth it especially because the Pro compute ability (which is what ios and web development relies on) is equivalent to that of the Max.

go with the Pro, you won't regret it. the max is only for people doing a lot of 3D or video editing.

Would it also play 5k or 8k action camera video without stuttering? I am referring to Gopro 5k video?
Thanks
Raj

 

[rajkumarpatel79]

Thank You Guys. I may pull the trigger for 16GB RAM. with 1TB SSD, guess it use SSD for overflow memory area.

Would it also play 5k or 8k action camera video without stuttering? I am referring to Gopro 5k video?
Thanks
Raj

As well, in terms of timing, I still have a month to buy it. Are we anticipating further price drop of M1 Macbook pro? Its at £2090 at costco UK (cheapest far by with 3 yrs of technical support for product fault). I have to buy this November this year for Uni course.

 

[tim1000]

How does the 14 inch compare to the 16 inch in battery life?

 

[ilikewhey]

The reason your RAM usage is so high is simple - On these new ARM machines, MacOS is designed to expand its footprint to utilize the RAM space that it has. So if you have 16 GB, it will use it. If you have 32 GB, it all use it. And if you have 64 GB, it will allow programs to use all of it as needed.

So in other words, you're not actually running short of RAM. And thanks to the high speed of the SSDs, it isn't that big of a deal if the MacBook ever has to do some disc swapping. This is why so many people say that 64 GB of RAM is overkill....It takes A LOT of insanely large files to ever come close to using that amount. And even if it does start to run short, it will simply disc swap as needed and you'll notice little if any difference.

Mmm not sure about that, my recent folder stopped working after 6gb of swap, apps like chrome and mail also exhibiting odd behaviors here and there like random buttons not functional.

 

[playtech1]

The sweet spot for the 14 inch MBP is the 16GB/1TB/10 Core model, simply because it's the stock higher end SKU and so widely available with a discount from the retailer.

If you want anything upgraded you not only have to pay the extortionate Apple upgrade prices, but you lose the discount from buying retail.

If you need the extra power an upgrade brings then go for it - but it's not the sweet spot.

I personally have the 14 inch 10 Core Pro 16GB/1TB and the 16 inch Max 32GB/2TB and next time around would skip the Max upgrade to be honest. For me the better GPU is not consistently useful enough to justify the upgrade.

 

[mdhaus72]

Mmm not sure about that, my recent folder stopped working after 6gb of swap, apps like chrome and mail also exhibiting odd behaviors here and there like random buttons not functional.

It's likely a glitch, as I've seen disc swap of that type go much higher than that; a friend of mine has 16 GB of RAM in his MBP and he disc swaps like crazy....but it never slows down his computer in any perceptible way. Also, keep in mind that Chrome is notoriously RAM heavy regardless of the RAM configuration - It's just not a very well optimized product right now on these MacBooks. My guess is the button issue is also just a glitch.

MacOS on these machines is designed to "play in the sandbox it is given." So because of this, with an amount of RAM like 64 GB, all you're really doing is delaying the point that it needs to disc swap. And as I said, thanks to the really fast drives that Apple included, you very rarely will even notice a change in performance when it does this.

 

[ilikewhey]

It's likely a glitch, as I've seen disc swap of that type go much higher than that; a friend of mine has 16 GB of RAM in his MBP and he disc swaps like crazy....but it never slows down his computer in any perceptible way. Also, keep in mind that Chrome is notoriously RAM heavy regardless of the RAM configuration - It's just not a very well optimized product right now on these MacBooks. My guess is the button issue is also just a glitch.

MacOS on these machines is designed to "play in the sandbox it is given." So because of this, with an amount of RAM like 64 GB, all you're really doing is delaying the point that it needs to disc swap. And as I said, thanks to the really fast drives that Apple included, you very rarely will even notice a change in performance when it does this.

must be an on going glitch since i restarted 5 times and the same sequence of events manifested. i have since got a 14inch 64gb and been using it without any swap or mishap i experienced with my wife's 16gb m1 mba.

 

[mdhaus72]

must be an on going glitch since i restarted 5 times and the same sequence of events manifested. i have since got a 14inch 64gb and been using it without any swap or mishap i experienced with my wife's 16gb m1 mba.

Obviously you're going to see disc swapping occur on a 16 GB machine much faster than what you see on a computer with 64 GB of RAM. You're also comparing a MacBook Air to a MacBook Pro, which isn't exactly an apples-to-apples comparison in terms of hardware specifications.

As I said, the computer will always use the space it has available. The reason why the general consensus is that it isn't worth it to have 64 GB of RAM in most cases is because of the availability of compression and disc swapping. Very rarely will a person notice any difference in performance when the computer starts dumping to the hard drive. We have several machines here at my office of varying RAM and SSD configurations. And what's remarkable is how little if any performance differences we see between the computers that have higher and lower amounts of RAM. Even the 8GB models rarely display a difference in operation. Apple did a great job designing these chips and the unified memory structure and hyper-fast SSDs make a huge difference.

The bottom line is if you are a person who is obsessed with making sure that little to no disc swapping occurs, then it perhaps make sense to fork over the much larger costs for the 64 GB of RAM. But for most people, it's going to be a big waste of money - They won't see a tangible difference that makes it worth it.

 

[platinumaqua]

Base CPU+32GB RAM+1TB SSD was what I went with

 

[TinyMito]

The problem is, I heard same stories about MacBook Airs. People claiming to get 12h, while I was getting 6h tops when new.

That's Intel chip ones. Apple Silicon you can trust.

 

[ilikewhey]

Obviously you're going to see disc swapping occur on a 16 GB machine much faster than what you see on a computer with 64 GB of RAM. You're also comparing a MacBook Air to a MacBook Pro, which isn't exactly an apples-to-apples comparison in terms of hardware specifications.

As I said, the computer will always use the space it has available. The reason why the general consensus is that it isn't worth it to have 64 GB of RAM in most cases is because of the availability of compression and disc swapping. Very rarely will a person notice any difference in performance when the computer starts dumping to the hard drive. We have several machines here at my office of varying RAM and SSD configurations. And what's remarkable is how little if any performance differences we see between the computers that have higher and lower amounts of RAM. Even the 8GB models rarely display a difference in operation. Apple did a great job designing these chips and the unified memory structure and hyper-fast SSDs make a huge difference.

The bottom line is if you are a person who is obsessed with making sure that little to no disc swapping occurs, then it perhaps make sense to fork over the much larger costs for the 64 GB of RAM. But for most people, it's going to be a big waste of money - They won't see a tangible difference that makes it worth it.

no thats not correct at all, you shouldn't mislead others with that statement, memory swapping does have a long term effect. RAM is your fastest memory. Swap is slower so you want to minimize the use of swap memory. on number of occasions when my ram pressure turn yellow, i noticed significant slow down when opening new apps or even tabs.

Swapping to an SSD/NVME uses up the disk’s write cycles - every block of these disks can only take a limited number of writes before failing. Modern SSDs take care of this issue by moving the hotspots and “mapping out” the bad areas (and probably a host of other methods I’m not even aware of) - but the limitation is still there and swapping eats into your disk’s life span. sure you can argue that ssd can endure a lot of wear and tear, and it won't have a failing point like earlier gens, but what alot of articles out there won't point out is you are slowly creating bad sectors on the ssd and losing out the total storage space over the span of the ssd lifecycle.

and lastly, yes i can compare my 64gb mbp to my wife's 16gb mba, my workflow is neither cpu or gpu intensive and therefore all point of comparison between these two machines are irrelevant.

 

[mdhaus72]

no thats not correct at all, you shouldn't mislead others with that statement, memory swapping does have a long term effect. RAM is your fastest memory. Swap is slower so you want to minimize the use of swap memory. on number of occasions when my ram pressure turn yellow, i noticed significant slow down when opening new apps or even tabs.

Swapping to an SSD/NVME uses up the disk’s write cycles - every block of these disks can only take a limited number of writes before failing. Modern SSDs take care of this issue by moving the hotspots and “mapping out” the bad areas (and probably a host of other methods I’m not even aware of) - but the limitation is still there and swapping eats into your disk’s life span. sure you can argue that ssd can endure a lot of wear and tear, and it won't have a failing point like earlier gens, but what alot of articles out there won't point out is you are slowly creating bad sectors on the ssd and losing out the total storage space over the span of the ssd lifecycle.

and lastly, yes i can compare my 64gb mbp to my wife's 16gb mba, my workflow is neither cpu or gpu intensive and therefore all point of comparison between these two machines are irrelevant.

Yes, disc swapping is slower...but the high speed SSDs that Apple has put into these machines, along with the fact that the RAM system is unified and ultra-fast, speeds things up to the point where it generally isn't a significant issue. And no, most people will not notice a significant slow-down with most tasks. This is why testing has shown that there isn't usually a huge drop-off in performance when the testers compare machines with different RAM configurations.

Modern SSD drives, like those in the MacBooks, are designed to withstand a huge number of write cycles before you run into any potential problems. By the time you would get to where it's actually a problem, chances are you will be upgrading to a different device anyway. Yes, SSDs can fail just like any other hard drive....but read/write cycle "wear out" is not likely. It isn't like the old days when SSDs first became available to consumers and people had to be really mindful about how they were used. Today's SSDs are much more resilient and durable.

The reason why it doesn't make sense to compare those two machines is because their hardware isn't exactly the same. And beyond that, obviously the MBA with 16 GB of RAM is going to hit "disc swap" status much faster than a MacBook Pro with 64 GB of RAM. If disc swapping was such a huge factor in hurting overall performance, it would be obvious to all of the people who are successfully using these machines with only 16 GB of RAM (and sometimes only 8 GB!) to do their intensive tasks. But they aren't running into problems...because it's usually not one.

 

[ilikewhey]

Yes, disc swapping is slower...but the high speed SSDs that Apple has put into these machines, along with the fact that the RAM system is unified and ultra-fast, speeds things up to the point where it generally isn't a significant issue. And no, most people will not notice a significant slow-down with most tasks. This is why testing has shown that there isn't usually a huge drop-off in performance when the testers compare machines with different RAM configurations.

Modern SSD drives, like those in the MacBooks, are designed to withstand a huge number of write cycles before you run into any potential problems. By the time you would get to where it's actually a problem, chances are you will be upgrading to a different device anyway. Yes, SSDs can fail just like any other hard drive....but read/write cycle "wear out" is not likely. It isn't like the old days when SSDs first became available to consumers and people had to be really mindful about how they were used. Today's SSDs are much more resilient and durable.

The reason why it doesn't make sense to compare those two machines is because their hardware isn't exactly the same. And beyond that, obviously the MBA with 16 GB of RAM is going to hit "disc swap" status much faster than a MacBook Pro with 64 GB of RAM. If disc swapping was such a huge factor in hurting overall performance, it would be obvious to all of the people who are successfully using these machines with only 16 GB of RAM (and sometimes only 8 GB!) to do their intensive tasks. But they aren't running into problems...because it's usually not one.

yes ram system is unified and fast, ssd speed still 2400mhz read/write, worse if you have the base m2 mba. this is essentially the same debate of getting either 8gb or 16gb back couple of years. unified memory for the apple silicon actually makes the situation WORSE since gpu and cpu share from the same memory pool, back on the intel macs, dedicated gpu has their own ram memory vs sharing with the cpu.

modern SSD actually have WORSE endurance since it's TLC, unless apple is slapping super expensive SLC into every mac. the only improvement is modern SSD has way more sufficiated controller chip, but more efficient controller still won't mitigate bad sector from formation. therefore read/write cycle isn't just likely, its unavoidable, even without memory swap.

no, i'm getting 0 swap AT ALL on the 64gb, there is no approaching memory swap when you have sufficient ram. tons of folks who currently own a 16gb base 14inch regretting not getting more ram from the get go. again, this is literally the 8gb vs 16gb but in 2022 and beyond. with increased functionality and ever more complex coding from osx, your ram availability will be the first to be hit with performance detriment. one of the biggest problem i had during heavy swap was how erratic slack and ms team behaved, from slack would essentially ceased to function time to time to the webcam not being found, often leading me to tell my team the meeting would have to be delayed so i can restart my laptop. problems with memory swap do exist, you or anyone else saying otherwise cause you or anyone else haven't personally push it far enough to see a problem.

again, i can absolutely compare the m1 16gb vs m1 max 64gb, everything i do is non gpu cpu intensive, therefore its fair to exclude their differences since i wasn't pushing the performance limitation on the m1 from the first place.

 

[mdhaus72]

yes ram system is unified and fast, ssd speed still 2400mhz read/write, worse if you have the base m2 mba. this is essentially the same debate of getting either 8gb or 16gb back couple of years. unified memory for the apple silicon actually makes the situation WORSE since gpu and cpu share from the same memory pool, back on the intel macs, dedicated gpu has their own ram memory vs sharing with the cpu.

modern SSD actually have WORSE endurance since it's TLC, unless apple is slapping super expensive SLC into every mac. the only improvement is modern SSD has way more sufficiated controller chip, but more efficient controller still won't mitigate bad sector from formation. therefore read/write cycle isn't just likely, its unavoidable, even without memory swap.

no, i'm getting 0 swap AT ALL on the 64gb, there is no approaching memory swap when you have sufficient ram. tons of folks who currently own a 16gb base 14inch regretting not getting more ram from the get go. again, this is literally the 8gb vs 16gb but in 2022 and beyond. with increased functionality and ever more complex coding from osx, your ram availability will be the first to be hit with performance detriment. one of the biggest problem i had during heavy swap was how erratic slack and ms team behaved, from slack would essentially ceased to function time to time to the webcam not being found, often leading me to tell my team the meeting would have to be delayed so i can restart my laptop. problems with memory swap do exist, you or anyone else saying otherwise cause you or anyone else haven't personally push it far enough to see a problem.

again, i can absolutely compare the m1 16gb vs m1 max 64gb, everything i do is non gpu cpu intensive, therefore its fair to exclude their differences since i wasn't pushing the performance limitation on the m1 from the first place.

LOL...You are still stuck on comparing a machine with SIXTEEN GB of RAM to another machine with SIXTY-FOUR GB of RAM. And on top of that, the RAM is in different machines with slightly different hardware. Why are you so shocked that you would hit the "disc swap" point on a 16 GB machine much sooner than on a 64 GB machine? LOL

RAM is RAM...At a most basic level, you will always use it - not just when you're doing CPU/GPU intensive work. Every program you open and every process you assign within them is going to take RAM to function. This is why a person can do nothing but open up a crap-ton of tabs in their internet browser and there will be a growing RAM hit. Are there some people who wish they got more RAM than 16 GB? Sure. But a "ton?" Likely not, as most people who are of the mindset of running intensive workflows would be buying more RAM to begin with.

As I said, the odds of your SSD drive failing earlier because of disc swaps is very minimal - Chances are you will upgrade to a different machine before you get there.

I'm sorry you have this perception that disc swapping is so awful for you.....That is not remotely close to the experience that we have had in our office environment where we now have hundreds of Macs with these set-ups out in the field. These machines get pushed hard and performance issues related to disc swapping are simply not a thing.

 

[rajkumarpatel79]

Guys, has anyone has any experience of 5k gopro videos on M1 mbp (16GB RAM)? Does the video stutter during play and edit and struggle? As well, is it capable enough to handle RAW images from mirrorless camera?

Thanks
Raj

 

[CalMin]

You guys never felt the shortage of RAM?

I have seen memory pressure go into the red with a Windows 11 VM running a ton of open apps, a DevonTHINK database with 40GB files, Zoom, Teams, every MS Office app, and a million other apps and tabs open. But I never felt a performance hit or hiccup. I was just curious to see how my RAM was doing with that crap opened up.

Everyone's experience might vary, but when I go into Activity Monitor I often see it yellow and sometimes even red. BUT the system never feels unresponsive or even slow. It handles everything that I throw at it like butter with just 16GB.

I think there's a lot of undue anxiety over memory pressure and SSD wear with swap. I have never had a computer fail prematurely because of this issue. When (or if) it becomes a concern, I suspect the machine will be 3-5 years old and I'll be itching for something new anyway.

 

[ilikewhey]

LOL...You are still stuck on comparing a machine with SIXTEEN GB of RAM to another machine with SIXTY-FOUR GB of RAM. And on top of that, the RAM is in different machines with slightly different hardware. Why are you so shocked that you would hit the "disc swap" point on a 16 GB machine much sooner than on a 64 GB machine? LOL

RAM is RAM...At a most basic level, you will always use it - not just when you're doing CPU/GPU intensive work. Every program you open and every process you assign within them is going to take RAM to function. This is why a person can do nothing but open up a crap-ton of tabs in their internet browser and there will be a growing RAM hit. Are there some people who wish they got more RAM than 16 GB? Sure. But a "ton?" Likely not, as most people who are of the mindset of running intensive workflows would be buying more RAM to begin with.

As I said, the odds of your SSD drive failing earlier because of disc swaps is very minimal - Chances are you will upgrade to a different machine before you get there.

I'm sorry you have this perception that disc swapping is so awful for you.....That is not remotely close to the experience that we have had in our office environment where we now have hundreds of Macs with these set-ups out in the field. These machines get pushed hard and performance issues related to disc swapping are simply not a thing.

i'm not worried about ssd failing however the risk is there, for you to so blatantly ignore it is a disservice to everyone reading. OBVIOUSLY i'm going to compare what i got now vs what i had before, thats how comparison works. if you need a refresh on what does comparison means, here is the webster dictionary:

"Definition of comparison​

1: the act or process of comparing: such as
a: the representing of one thing or person as similar to or like another"


at no where did i say i'm shocked, in fact i expected this result, hence why i spend 4k and waited a month and a half for this BTO.

ram is ram, if you feel like 16gb works for you good, but if your workflow dictates more don't lean on memory swap too much cause at some point issues will arise, this is especially troublesome with windowserver constantly ballooning up if you don't restart every other week. the problem with your argument is that you are under the illusion that if your office is pushing swap and not experiencing any issues, than no one else should right? i'm sorry that you fell into the classic if it didn't happen to me, it won't happen to anyone else.

again i already explained what i experienced when memory swap got too much, slacks stuttered and ms team ceased to play nice, i had to delay a entire meeting just to troubleshoot. and again, if you or your company as you claimed, aren't experience issues related to memory swap, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it just means you didn't push it hard enough.

 

[mreg376]

Hi guys,

I'm planning to get MacBook Pro 14" when M2 arrives. But before then, I'd like to understand better what it takes when it comes to choosing Pro vs. Max CPU.

Let's say that the price is not the key factor, but if upgrading doesn't make any sense, then I'd not. I'll use my machine mostly for web development and iOS development. I decided to go with 14", as I find 16" just too bulky to carry around.

I've seen articles about M1 Max affecting the battery life and not giving anything in return for most users. Not sure how true it is, so I'll just ask this: which config would you choose in my case? M1 Pro or M1 Max? Max could give me up to 64 GB RAM, but I doubt I'd ever need as much. And if I stick to Pro, does it make any sense to upgrade to 10-core CPU with 16-core GPU? Also, does this choice affect the battery life?

I think the sweet spot, unless you have unusually high requirements or a limited budget, is the Max with 24 core CPU, and 32 GB RAM. Once you go to 32 GB, which I think is advisable if you're going to be using the device for several years, the Max 24 is only $200 more than the Pro, and you're getting, if nothing else, double the memory bandwidth and more monitor support.

 

[mdhaus72]

i'm not worried about ssd failing however the risk is there, for you to so blatantly ignore it is a disservice to everyone reading. OBVIOUSLY i'm going to compare what i got now vs what i had before, thats how comparison works. if you need a refresh on what does comparison means, here is the webster dictionary:

"Definition of comparison​

1: the act or process of comparing: such as
a: the representing of one thing or person as similar to or like another"


at no where did i say i'm shocked, in fact i expected this result, hence why i spend 4k and waited a month and a half for this BTO.

ram is ram, if you feel like 16gb works for you good, but if your workflow dictates more don't lean on memory swap too much cause at some point issues will arise, this is especially troublesome with windowserver constantly ballooning up if you don't restart every other week. the problem with your argument is that you are under the illusion that if your office is pushing swap and not experiencing any issues, than no one else should right? i'm sorry that you fell into the classic if it didn't happen to me, it won't happen to anyone else.

again i already explained what i experienced when memory swap got too much, slacks stuttered and ms team ceased to play nice, i had to delay a entire meeting just to troubleshoot. and again, if you or your company as you claimed, aren't experience issues related to memory swap, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it just means you didn't push it hard enough.

I'm not ignoring the potential pitfalls of SSD issues...I'm just saying that the overwhelming odds are that your machine will be retired before the drive fails, even if it is doing a ton of disc swapping. And other parts of the computer are at just as high of a risk.

Is it possible the drive will go first? Yes.

Likely? Hell no!

Is it worth treating the concept of "disc swap" as something that is a major no-no if it happens? Absolutely not.

Is it worth buying a ton more RAM at Apple's inflated prices just because of an irrational fear of disc swapping? LOL...No.

If you truly expected the 16 GB machine to hit the disc swap stage sooner than the other computer, then why bring it up as a topic before? Nowhere did I say that just because our office isn't having issues, that it automatically means nobody else is. My point was that if you were going to make grand proclamations based on your personal experience, then it's only fair that I and others get to do the same.

Trust me, we push our machines a lot...and I'm willing to bet it's just as hard as you do, if not harder. I'm sorry your individual set-up caused you issues....Thankfully, it's not widespread.

 

[mdhaus72]

I have seen memory pressure go into the red with a Windows 11 VM running a ton of open apps, a DevonTHINK database with 40GB files, Zoom, Teams, every MS Office app, and a million other apps and tabs open. But I never felt a performance hit or hiccup. I was just curious to see how my RAM was doing with that crap opened up.

Everyone's experience might vary, but when I go into Activity Monitor I often see it yellow and sometimes even red. BUT the system never feels unresponsive or even slow. It handles everything that I throw at it like butter with just 16GB.

I think there's a lot of undue anxiety over memory pressure and SSD wear with swap. I have never had a computer fail prematurely because of this issue. When (or if) it becomes a concern, I suspect the machine will be 3-5 years old and I'll be itching for something new anyway.

100% correct. Thanks to these ultra-fast hard drives and RAM, the computers very rarely run into a performance issue when they do any disc swapping.

And like you said, the computer is almost always going to be retired long before the SSD wears out or has significant problems.

 

[mdhaus72]

I think the sweet spot, unless you have unusually high requirements or a limited budget, is the Max with 24 core CPU, and 32 GB RAM. Once you go to 32 GB, which I think is advisable if you're going to be using the device for several years, the Max 24 is only $200 more than the Pro, and you're getting, if nothing else, double the memory bandwidth and more monitor support.

I agree. It might also be affordable for them to upgrade to the 32-core GPU from the 24-core version. As I recall, it wasn't a huge price hit...but maybe that has changed.

 

[ilikewhey]

Is it worth buying a ton more RAM at Apple's inflated prices just because of an irrational fear of disc swapping? LOL...No.

there is no irrational fear, as i stated numerous times already yet you continuously ignored, the memory swap has caused a negative impact on my productivity with slack and team, feel free to scroll up and recap the exact reasons since i'm done sounding like a broken record for your sake.

If you truly expected the 16 GB machine to hit the disc swap stage sooner than the other computer, then why bring it up as a topic before? Nowhere did I say that just because our office isn't having issues, that it automatically means nobody else is. My point was that if you were going to make grand proclamations based on your personal experience, then it's only fair that I and others get to do the same.

cause i have the same workflow on my windows yet never had any memory swap, but yet on osx the ram usage just continuously balloon up.

you don't have to say it, your statements justify enough for me to call you out on it. i never dismiss your claim like you do to mine, you can do as you wish, all i'm saying is, if you can't replicate my experience, don't give you the right to dismiss it.

Trust me, we push our machines a lot...and I'm willing to bet it's just as hard as you do, if not harder. I'm sorry your individual set-up caused you issues....Thankfully, it's not widespread.

doubt it, my job is operation lead and im forced to manage several departments within the company, marketing alone takes up 14 tabs and force me to have final cut on a pinch before senior management meetings.

 

[elmarjazz]

I would have been super happy with a storage upgrade to 1TB on my MBP 14", but... I got this 'open-box' basically a like-new base model. So for cost, it was a very 'sweet spot' ;-)

 

[mdhaus72]

there is no irrational fear, as i stated numerous times already yet you continuously ignored, the memory swap has caused a negative impact on my productivity with slack and team, feel free to scroll up and recap the exact reasons since i'm done sounding like a broken record for your sake.

I'm sorry that has happened for you. It's rare and is not a problem for the majority of people.

cause i have the same workflow on my windows yet never had any memory swap, but yet on osx the ram usage just continuously balloon up.

We've already gone over this. It's "ballooning up" because MacOS will always expand and utilize the full pool of RAM that it is given. Your machine is not running out of RAM...it's simply utilizing it in the most efficient way possible.

you don't have to say it, your statements justify enough for me to call you out on it. i never dismiss your claim like you do to mine, you can do as you wish, all i'm saying is, if you can't replicate my experience, don't give you the right to dismiss it.

I'm not dismissing it...I'm saying that it's not common.

doubt it, my job is operation lead and im forced to manage several departments within the company, marketing alone takes up 14 tabs and force me to have final cut on a pinch before senior management meetings.

Our office does high-level coding and generates media content throughout each work day. I guarantee that you're not pushing your machine any harder than we are pushing ours.

 

[ilikewhey]

I'm sorry that has happened for you. It's rare and is not a problem for the majority of people.


We've already gone over this. It's "ballooning up" because MacOS will always expand and utilize the full pool of RAM that it is given. Your machine is not running out of RAM...it's simply utilizing it in the most efficient way possible.


I'm not dismissing it...I'm saying that it's not common.


Our office does high-level coding and generates media content throughout each work day. I guarantee that you're not pushing your machine any harder than we are pushing ours.

LOL there you go again, assuming my workflow.

really, this screams i'm not running out of ram? 😂 😂 😂